Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200874

Original file (ND1200874.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-AA, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20120306

Characterization of Service Received:

Narrative Reason for Discharge:
Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN

Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:
         Narrative Reason change to:

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive:         US N R (DEP)        19980814 - 19980826     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 19980827     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 19990319      Highest Rank/Rate: AA
Length of Service: Y ear( s ) M onth( s ) 21 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 61
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: NOB ( 1 )      Behavior: NOB ( 1 )        OTA: 3.00

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      NONE

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP :    S CM : SPCM: C C :     Retention Warning Counseling :

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

The NDRB did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form 214:

         “ 00 06 21 ”
         “ MILPERSMAN 1910-134 ”
         “ FRAUDULENT ENTRY ”

The NDRB will recommend to the Commander, Navy Personnel Command, that the DD 214 be corrected as appropriate.

Types of Documents Submitted/reviewed

Related to Military Service:
         DD 214:          Service/ Medical Record:          Other Records:

Related to Post-Service Period:
         Employment:               Finances:                 Education/Training:
         Health/Medical Records:          Rehabilitation/Treatment:                  Criminal Records:
         Personal Documentation :          Community Service:                References:
         Department of VA letter:                  Oth er Documentation:
                  Additional Statements :
         From Applicant:          From /To Representation:          From /To Congress m ember :

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB)
DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT

Applicant’s Issues

1.        The Applicant contends it was his recruiter ’s responsibility, not his, to discover outstanding warrants for arrest.
2.       The Applicant contends his in-service conduct warrants consideration for an upgrade to Honorable.
3.       The Applicant contends he did not commit misconduct in-service and did not warrant a General discharge.
4.       The Applicant contends his post-service conduct warrants consideration for an upgrade.

Decision

Date : 20 1 30129             Location: Washington D.C .        R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall .

Discussion

The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge, is authorized to change the character of service and the reason for discharg e if such change is warranted. In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of g overnment al affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant . T he Board did complete a thorough review of the circumstances that led to discharge and the discharge process to ensure discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety. The Applicant’s record of service began on 27 August 1998 upon enlistment into the United States Navy and ended on 19 March 1999 when he was administratively separated for reason of fraudulent enlistment. The Applicant served a total of 205 days of active service. The NDRB did not have the Applicant’s administrative separation paperwork and so could not determine if the Applicant elected or waived his rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request a General Court-Martial Convening Authority Review. However, a review of his records shows that the General Court-Martial Convening Authority did conduct a review of the Applicant’s records and administrative separation processing and determined the Applicant had been afforded all due process rights and was properly being separated for Fraudulent Enlistment.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends it was his recruiter’s responsibility, not his, to discover outstanding warrants for arrest. The Applicant’s record is incomplete , and the NDRB could not find the specifics of the fraudulent enlistment and existing warrants against the Applicant. However, it was the Applicant’s responsibility, not his recruiter’s, to truthfully represent himself during the enlistment process. The NDRB found that the documentation and statements provided for review do not refute the presumption that the Applicant deliberately misrepresented his criminal history during the enlistment process, including the omission or concealment of facts , which, if known at the time , would have reasonably been expected to preclude, postpone, or otherwise affect the Applicant’s eligibility for enlistment or induction. No other narrative reason other than F raudulent E ntry more clearly describes the circumstances surrounding the Applicant’s processing for administrative separation. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his in-service conduct warrants consideration for an upgrade of his discharge to Honorable. An Honorable characterization of service is warranted when the quality of a member’s service generally meets the standard of acceptable conduct and performance for Naval personnel, or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization of service would be clearly inappropriate. A General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge is warranted when the quality of the member’s service has been honest and faithful but significant negative aspects of the member’s conduct or performance of duty outweighed the positive aspects of the member’s service record. Considering the fraudulent nature of the enlistment, the NDRB determined the discharge was proper and equitable. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he did not commit misconduct in-service and did not warrant a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge. A General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge is warranted when the quality of the member’s service has been honest and faithful but significant negative aspects of the member’s conduct or performance of duty outweighed the positive aspects of the member’s service record. It was discovered during entry level training that the Applicant had fraudulently enlisted into the Navy , t herefore , providing the negative aspect of conduct that warranted his General discharge. Relief denied.

Issue 4: (Decisional) (Equity) RELIEF NOT WARRANTED. The Applicant contends his post-service conduct warrants consideration for an upgrade. The NDRB considers outstanding post-service conduct to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the Applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review. The Applicant provided a personal statement and training completion certificates. The Applicant could have provided documentation as detailed in the Post-Service Conduct paragraph in the Addendum , however, completion of these items alone does not guarantee an upgrade from an unfavorable discharge as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case by case basis to determine if post-service conduct establishes that the in-service misconduct was an aberration. The characterization of service received was appropriate. Relief denied.

Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s s ummary of s ervice, r ecord e ntries, and d ischarge p rocess, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall remain . The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen years from the date of discharge. The Applicant is directed to the Addendum for additional information.

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A. The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 18, effective 12 December 1997 until 2 February 2001, Article 1910-134, Separation by Reason of Defective Enlistments and Inductions - Fraudulent Entry Into the Naval Service.

B. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part II, Para 211, Regularity of Government Affairs , Part V, Para 502, Propriety and Para 503, Equity .

ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant

Complaint Procedures : If you believe the decision in your case is unclear, not responsive to the issues you raised, or does not otherwise comport with the decisional document requirements of DoD Instruction 1332.28, you may submit a complaint in accordance with Enclosure (5) of that Instruction to the Joint Service Review Activity, OUSD (P&R) PI-LP, The Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-4000. You should read Enclosure (5) of the Instruction before submitting such a complaint. The complaint procedure does not permit a challenge of the merits of the decision; it is designed solely to ensure that the decisional documents meet applicable requirements for clarity and responsiveness. You may view DoD Instruction 1332.28 and other Decisional Documents by going online at “ http://Boards.law.af.mil . ”

Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years of the Applicant’s date of discharge. The Applicant can provide documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments or any additional evidence related to this discharge. Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required. There are veterans organizations such as the American Legion and the Disabled American Veterans that are willing to provide guidance to former service members in their efforts to obtain a discharge upgrade. If a former member has been discharged for more than 15 years, has already been granted a personal appearance hearing or has otherwise exhausted their opportunities before the NDRB, the Applicant may petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR), 701 South Courthouse Road, Suite 1001, Arlington, VA 22204-2490 for further review.

Service Benefits: The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the NDRB. There is no requirement or law that grants recharacterization solely on the issue of obtaining veterans benefits and this issue does not serve to provide a foundation upon which the Board can grant relief.

Employment/Educational Opportunities : The NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities. Regulations limit the NDRB’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge.

Reenlistment/RE-code: Since the NDRB has no jurisdiction over reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Navy, Marine Corps, or any other of the Armed Forces, the NDRB is not authorized to change a reenlistment code. Only the BCNR can make changes to reenlistment codes. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. An unfavorable “RE” code is, in itself, not a bar to reenlistment. A request for a waiver can be submitted during the processing of a formal application for reenlistment through a recruiter.

Medical Conditions and Misconduct : DoD disability regulations do not preclude a disciplinary separation. Appropriate regulations stipulate that separations for misconduct take precedence over potential separations for other reasons. Whenever a member is being processed through the Physical Evaluation Board, and is processed subsequently for an administrative involuntary separation or is referred to a court martial for misconduct, the disability evaluation is suspended pending the outcome of the non-disability proceedings. If the action includes either a punitive or administrative discharge for misconduct or for any basis wherein an Other Than Honorable discharge is authorized, the medical board report is filed in the member’s terminated health record. Additionally, the NDRB does not have the authority to change a narrative reason for separation to one indicating a medical disability or other medical related reasons. Only the BCNR can grant this type of narrative reason change.

Automatic Upgrades - There is no law or regulation that provides for an unfavorable discharge to be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct subsequent to leaving naval service.

Post-Service Conduct : The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. Outstanding post-service conduct, to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the Applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review, is considered during Board reviews. Documentation to support a post-service conduct upgrade includes, but is not limited to: a verifiable continuous employment record; marriage and children’s birth certificates (if applicable); character witness statements; documentation of community or church service; certification of non-involvement with civil authorities; evidence of financial stability or letters of good standing from banks, credit card companies, or other financial institutions; attendance at or completion of higher education (official transcripts); and documentation of a drug-free lifestyle. The Applicant is advised that completion of these items alone does not guarantee the upgrade of an unfavorable discharge, as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case-by-case basis to determine if post-service accomplishments help demonstrate in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character.

Issues Concerning Bad-Conduct Discharges (BCD ): Because relevant and material facts stated in a court-martial specification are presumed by the NDRB to be established facts, issues relating to the Applicant’s innocence of charges for which he was found guilty cannot form a basis for relief. With respect to a discharge adjudged by a special court-martial, the action of the NDRB is restricted to upgrades based on clemency. Clemency is an act of leniency that reduces the severity of the punishment imposed. The NDRB does not have the jurisdictional authority to review a discharge or dismissal resulting from a general court-martial.

Board Membership: The names and votes of the members of the NDRB Board are recorded on the original of this document and may be obtained from the service records by writing to:

Secretary of the Navy Council of Review Boards
Attn: Naval Discharge Review Board
720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309
Washington Navy Yard DC 20374-5023

Similar Decisions

USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000070

Original file (MD1000070.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues The Applicant seeks appropriate relief by a change to his characterization of service to Honorable and a narrative reason for separation change to “Defective Enlistment” or ‘Fraudulent Entry into Military Service. Therefore, under equity, the Applicant should have been separated for erroneous enlistment or fraudulent enlistment and that his service was honorable; as such, the...
NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200045

Original file (ND1200045.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends he did not fraudulently enlist, because when he enlisted he did not know that the child was his.2. Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and discharge process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1102133

Original file (ND1102133.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The absence of an ADSEP package in his official record at Navy Personnel Command does not, by itself, warrant an upgrade in the characterization of service. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years of the Applicant’s date of discharge. There is no requirement or law that grants recharacterization solely on the issue of obtaining veterans...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1102155

Original file (ND1102155.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Representation: NONE By a vote of the Characterization shall .By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall FRAUDULENT ENTRY (DRUG ABUSE).Discussion The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge, is authorized to change the character of service and the reason for discharge if such change is warranted.In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to...
NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301400

Original file (ND1301400.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Representation: By a vote of the Characterization shall .By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall .Discussion The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge, is authorized to change the character of service and the reason for discharge if such change is warranted.In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include...
USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400215

Original file (MD1400215.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the NDRB determined the Applicant warranted an Honorable characterization of service for his second enlistment but did not warrant a change to the narrative reason for separation. Relief granted.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and discharge process, the Board found The NDRB voted unanimously to...
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1002260

Original file (ND1002260.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Types of Documents Submitted/reviewedRelated to Military Service: DD 214: Service/Medical Record: Other Records: Related to Post-Service Period: Employment: Finances: Education/Training: Health/Medical Records: Rehabilitation/Treatment: Criminal Records: Personal Documentation: Community Service: References: Department of VA letter: Other Documentation: Additional Statements: From Applicant: From/To Representation: From/To Congress member: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD...
USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201271

Original file (MD1201271.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Types of Documents Submitted/reviewedRelated to Military Service: DD 214: Service/Medical Record: Other Records: Related to Post-Service Period: Employment: Finances: Education/Training: Health/Medical Records: Rehabilitation/Treatment: Criminal Records: Personal Documentation: Community Service: References: Department of VA letter: Other Documentation: Additional Statements: From Applicant: From/To Representation: From/To Congress member: Pertinent Regulation/Law A. Relief denied.Summary:...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900583

Original file (ND0900583.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Record of service. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant Complaint Procedures : If you believe that the decision in your case is unclear, not responsive to the issues you raised, or does not otherwise comport with the decisional document requirements of DoD Instruction 1332.28, you may submit a...
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001162

Original file (ND1001162.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)20080402 - 20080414Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20080415Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20090421Highest Rank/Rate: SNLength of Service: Year(s)Month(s)07 Day(s)Education Level:AFQT: 38EvaluationMarks:Performance:3.0(1)Behavior:1.0(1)OTA: 2.67Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):Periods of...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200874

Similar Decisions